The effects of achievement goal orientations and safety climate on safe and unsafe behavior

Article Sidebar

Main Article Content

JiHee Jung

The Catholic University of Korea

YoungSeok Park

The Catholic University of Korea

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to test the effect of achievement goal orientations and safety climate on safe and unsafe behaviors. Safe behaviors were measured by observances and automatic safe behaviors, and unsafe behaviors by violations and mistakes. Three fifty employees from corporations were participated in this research. Both mastery approach goal and performance approach goal orientations have significant positive relations with the safe behaviors and negative relations with the unsafe behaviors, but both mastery avoidance goal and performance avoidance goal orientations have significant negative relations with the safe behaviors and positive relations with the unsafe behaviors. This results suggest to confirm the multiple goal perspective of the achievement goal orientation argued both mastery goal and performance goal orientations have relations with adaptive and maladaptive behaviors. Safety climates measured by five factors, management values, safety practice, safety training, safety communication, and supervisor leadership, were significant positive relations with safe behaviors and negative relations with unsafe behaviors. Specially safety climates have significantly stronger correlations with unintentional behaviors(automatic safe behavior and mistake) than intentional behaviors(observance and violation). The relative contributions of individual variables and organizational variables to safe and unsafe behaviors were discussed.

Chan, D. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 234–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.234

Han, T. Y. (2010). An Investigation of the Construct of Performance Evaluation System Effectiveness from the Evaluatee’s Perspective and Its Measurement Tool. Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 23(2), 365-394. https://doi.org/10.24230/ksiop.23.2.201005.365

Hinkin, T. R., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1989). Development and application of new scales to measure the French and Raven (1959) bases of social power. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 561–567. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.561

Kim, S. H. (2006). The effect of team organizational factor and teamness on team adaptive performance: Mediating effects of team empowerment and Moderating effects of team task interdependence. (Kwangwoon University). Retrieved from http://www.riss.kr/link?id=T10848441

Neuman, J. H., & Baron, R. A. (2003). Social antecedents of bullying: A social interactionist perspective, In Bullying and Emotional Abuse in the Workplace International perspectives in research and practice. 185-202, London/New York: Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203164662.ch9

Tak, J. K., & Kang, K. S. (2011). A Study on the Relationship of Team Members’ Competitiveness, Team Commitment and Team Satisfaction: A Mediating Role of Relationship Conflict. Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 24(1), 157-181. https://doi.org/10.24230/ksiop.24.1.201102.157

Vartia, M. (1996). The sources of bullying–psychological work environment and organizational climate. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594329608414855